PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

Unelected judges should not be able to over rule elected parliament.

PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

By Muhammad Akram

LAHORE: With the resolve that the conduct of judges particularly in the speaker’s ruling case would be debated in parliament, the PPP has hinted at not letting the pro-active ‘independent’ judiciary to undermine the supremacy of parliament.

Dubbing a judgement to destabilise the elected PPP-led coalition government, the PPP parliamentary party meeting decided not to get provoked by the judiciary but check it through parliament and question the conduct of judges at an appropriate time, sources in the PPP told Daily Times.

“We are being provoked to react and confront the judiciary through this judgement at the behest of undemocratic forces to pave the way for an interim set up comprising so-called technocrats,’ said a PPP leader from central Punjab who wished anonymity keeping in view the sensitive nature of the matter.

“We will protest over this highly politicised and PPP-specific judgement, the way the democratic forces should protest yet will desist from taking it to a point of no return for the continuation of the current system and ensure a democratic transition,” the PPP leader said.

Asked about seeking the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz’s (PML-N) support to protect the system and for democratic transition given his expressed feared to the democratic system in the country, the PPP leader said, “It appeared that the PML-N is in complete control of team of hawks led by the Punjab chief minister, and PML-N President Nawaz Sharif was simply following their dictates unlike in the past when he played his role to rescue the political system put in danger by the moves of the deep state.”

The PPP leader said that the top party leadership was of the view that the Arsalan Iftikhar saga, involving property tycoon Malik Riaz, has much to do with the fast track disposal of the petitions against the speaker’s ruling despite the fact that the PPP government has avoided playing any role in the matter.

The PPP leader said the parliamentary party of the PPP was infuriated over the judgement like those of its allies but all are on the same page as far as the question of showing patience against high-handedness of the judiciary to the present government is concerned.

The PPP leader said the parliamentary party was of the view that some fundamental changes in the constitution are need of the hour, including the obsolete suo motu powers of the chief justice, which existed nowhere in modern democracies yet being applied in Pakistan as a tool to put the government on notice all the time.

The PPP leader said the party government would like to debate the matter in the existing parliament and would like to make it part of its election manifesto since the conduct of the judiciary under the existing laws is being used to undermine the authority of parliament.

“This will be for the benefit of all the democratic forces in the country as democracy cannot flourish and take roots in the presence of a judiciary hostile to the evolution of democratic culture and hostage to the undemocratic forces,” the PPP leader said.

The political observer sees political maturity on part of the parties engaged in the process of formation of coalition government for not confronting the judiciary instantly after the verdict and engaging themselves in the formation of a new government following what they termed as a judicial coup against an elected government.

The PPP leader said the judicial coup is far more dangerous than a military coup since it operates in the façade of champion of civil and political rights. The PPP leader termed the judgement not so different from the one passed by the judiciary of mid-50s when Maulvi Tamizuddin, the speaker of then assembly was denied justice and made to move from pillar to post at the behest of autocrat ruler of the time governor general Ghulam Muhammad.

“Parliament needs to rectify the damage inflicted to the parliamentary form of democracy in the country by the judgement in the speaker’s ruling case as no parliament can survive when its decisions are over-ruled by a set of judges in the judiciary,” the observer said. However, the observer added, political forces need to evolve a consensus on the role of the judiciary vis-à-vis its conduct with parliament since a pro-active judiciary would not let the parliamentary system thrive if it was made to exist under a hostile judiciary.

The observer said that with general elections mostly likely to be held this year, political forces need to do soul searching on the conduct of the judiciary and come up with a constitutional plan in their election manifestos where there is no threat to the parliamentary system, including the highly assertive and politicised judiciary.

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

Odd they do that in most democracies all the time.

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

But ruling parties in most democracies do not claim corruption to be one of the basic human rights either.

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

Oh yes I forget. They do it to protect democracy. In the rest of the world democracy doesn't need protecting. My bad.

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

Right, and corruption is limited to one party only. Btw, what about CJ's son who, it seems, was influence peddling using his fathers position as the CJP? And, how is it possible that CJ did not know his son and wife's activities? Shouldn't the Parliament investigate to see whether CJ was/is issuing favorable judgements to people who were picking up tab for his family's vacations to exotic foreign destinations?

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

.

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

MR is a well known land grabber & courts have been covering his a$$ for long time, but the question is shouldn't there be a investigation to see if CJ was doling out favorable judgements to him? Or CJ who is quick to condemns others is above the law?

As for Zardari's corruption, none has ever been proven ( I'm not saying he is not corrupt, btw).

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

Yes, there should be an investigation about CJ's wrongdoings re MR cases. WHO IS STOPPING THEM????

If Pakistani Supreme Court is biased, lets write a letter to Swiss courts. I am sure they are not biased. It would settle all.

Don't be so naive. We all know why Gilani lost his job. Saving Boss's millions.

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

Ever heard of 'murghay ki aik taang' ? or as AP once said...zameen junbad na junbad Gul Muhammad ? :)
parlimentrians can run havoc in the country and nobody should bother to raise a question...coz its democracy.. :)

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

Democracy needs more protection now than ever before... Thats if it is worth defending anymore. Meh

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

The new amendment PPP will bring in parliament would be, Corruption is basic human right, and Judiciary should make sure that Parliamentarians get their all rights including this one.

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

:hmmm:

Ex-Romania PM shoots self after court’s sentence - Emirates 24/7

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

What a coward!!! He didn’t have courage to ‘save democracy’.

Re: PPP says judicial ‘activism’ needs parliamentary review

Sorry Brother.. your statement is highly misleading. True he has not been convicted mainly due to manipulating the legal system in his favor but I can give you more than one example where his corruption is proved without a shadow of doubt:

1) He had been denying the ownership of a certain "Surrey" property openly in media.. later to claim the property in a UK court when the property was attached for sale.

2) In SGS/Cotecna case both these companies were prosecuted giving bribes to Bibi/Zardari in a Swiss court of law. Money transfer of these commissions was proved beyond a shadow of doubt and consequently these companies were punished for these crimes. As far as Zardari/Bibi were concerned the aggrieved party had to pursue these cases which in this case were people of Pakistan through the government of Pakistan. These cases were withdrawn when the illegal dictator made NRO deal with BB.

So please don't say Zardari's corruption was never proven.. you are only justified to say that" Zardari was never prosecuted for corruption.."

P.S> BTW.. it's the same famous 60 million dollars which was paid by SGS/Ctoecna to Bibi/Zardari for which these companies were prosecuted and the amount was frozen prior to NRO on the request of GOP.. and later the cases were dropped due defunct NRO legislation..